Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the return data but does not mention read-only nature, error cases (e.g., empty positions), prerequisites, or rate limits. More behavioral context is needed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with clear front-loading of functionality. The second sentence about the SDK is slightly extraneous but not harmful. Could be more concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple query tool with one parameter, the description is fairly complete. It covers what is returned. Lacks clarification on edge cases (empty results) but adequate given no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description of walletAddress. The description adds no additional parameter info beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it returns active staking positions for a wallet, listing specific data: staked amount, USD value, earned rewards, and APR per position. It identifies the resource (staking positions) and action (returns), distinguishing it from action-oriented siblings like fuse_smart_stake_token or fuse_get_staking_options.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when/when-not or alternatives are provided. While the description implies usage for querying staking positions, it does not guide the agent on when to use this vs. fuse_get_staking_options or other related tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.